This high court order declares the petition infructuous as respondent family members raised no objection to the marriage and posed no threat, dismissing the matter.
The petition was dismissed as infructuous; petitioners advised to approach police with representation if future threats arise.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No. M-11792 of 2012 Date of decision: 16.07.2012.
Ritu Rani and another
..Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others
..Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY
Present: Mr. Rakesh Bakshi, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Mr. S.S. Nara, Sr. DAG, Haryana, for respondents No.1 to 3 – State.
Mr. Sarvpreet Singh Gurna, Advocate, for respondents No.4 to 9.
Daya Chaudhary, J. (Oral)
Learned counsel appearing for respondents No.4 to 9 submits that the respondents No.4 to 9 have no objection with regard to the marriage of the petitioners and neither they have given any threat nor will give in future.
In view of the statement made by learned counsel for respondents No.4 to 9, no further direction is required to be issued and the petition has become infructuous.
Dismissed as infructuous.
However, In case, the petitioners feel any apprehension of threat, they are at liberty to move representation to the concerned Police authorities, which shall be looked into by them.
(DAYA CHAUDHARY) JUDGE
16.07.2012 neetu
Ritu Rani
State of Haryana
Respondents No.4 to 9
Daya Chaudhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
